ARTICLE DOWNLOAD

Cost-effectiveness of an exercise and nutritional intervention versus usual nutritional care during adjuvant treatment for localized breast cancer: the PASAPAS randomized controlled trial

10$
ARTICLE DOWNLOAD

Cost-effectiveness of an exercise and nutritional intervention versus usual nutritional care during adjuvant treatment for localized breast cancer: the PASAPAS randomized controlled trial

10$

Lionel Perrier, Aude-Marie Foucaut, Magali Morelle, Marina Touillaud, Anne-Sophie Kempf-Lépine, Dominik Heinz, Frédéric Gomez, Renaud Meyrand, Cédric Baudinet, Sophie Berthouze, Eric Reynes, Julien Carretier, Séverine Guillemaut, David Pérol, Olivier Trédan, Thierry Philip, Patrick Bachmann & Béatrice Fervers 

Abstract

We undertook a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) to compare an exercise and nutritional program with the usual nutritional care concomitant to adjuvant chemotherapy in localized breast cancer patients. The CEA was designed as part of the interventional, controlled, randomized, single-center, open-label PASAPAS study. Breast cancer patients receiving first-line adjuvant chemotherapy at a French Comprehensive Cancer Center were randomized 2:1 to a 6-month exercise program of supervised indoor and outdoor group sessions in addition to usual nutritional care (exercise arm) or a usual nutritional care group receiving dietary and physical activity counseling (control arm). Costs were assessed from the French national insurance perspective (in Euros, 2012). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for four criteria: body mass index, waist circumference, body fat percentage, and estimated aerobic capacity. Uncertainty around the ICERs was captured by a probabilistic analysis using a non-parametric bootstrap method. The analysis was based on 60 patients enrolled between 2011 and 2013. Average intervention costs per participant were €412 in the exercise arm (n = 41) and €117 (n = 19) in the control arm. Total mean costs were €17,344 (standard deviation 9,928) and €20,615 (standard deviation 14,904), respectively, did not differ significantly (p = 0.51). The 6-month exercise program was deemed to be cost-effective compared with usual care for the estimated aerobic capacity. Multicenter randomized studies with long-term costs and outcomes should be done to provide additional evidence

Only units of this product remain
Year 2020
Language English
Format PDF
DOI 10.1007/s00520-019-05078-4